This is the sorry story of the UN’s intransigence.
If the UN doesn’t like me now; they brought it all upon themselves, and at the risk of sounding like a broken grammophone record; it was all because they insisted on bending over backwards to defend that famous PIP….
Ultimately, it was the UNDT’s handling of this case that gave me no option, and eventually turned me into a minor media personality.
The long and winding road started with the PIP…. which, when invited to do so; Dzuro would not sign his name to. It would have saved a lot of grief for all concerned. All that was required was for someone to simply insist that Dzuro actually had to tell me what I was alleged to have done wrong…. but they would not and could not do that. Rather than admit there was a problem however, the UN went down the road of total destruction, giving me no quarter and leaving me no alternative.
OK, fine. I received the most patently retaliatory Annual Appraisal in the history of vindictiveness, and of course the Ethics Office claimed that that was “not retaliation.”
OK, fine. As provided for in the rules, I challenged that Appraisal through the rebuttal procedure. That went nowhere because the Rebuttal Panel concocted an excuse to avoid actually considering the Rebuttal, and so that went to the Management Evaluation Unit where it was given the Rip van Winkle treatment.
I was out of options. I had no choice but to go to the UNDT, even though it should never have been a “legal” issue. The underlying question was a very simple one; Does an employee have a right to know what he is alleged to have done wrong when being compelled to undergo “improvement” training? Bear in mind that that “training” is a preliminary step in a process that could result in his employment being terminated. Phrasing the same question the other way round; Does a supervisor have an obligation to explain to an employee what he has done wrong when taking action that has a potential impact on his employment? For a bonus point; How on Earth is any employee expected to “improve his performance” is nobody can tell him what he is supposed to have done wrong in the first place? It is a very simple management question. It is so simple in fact that it shouldn’t even need to be asked…… but this is the UN of course and the UN will argue that black is white if that is what they have to prove in order to justify a patently ridiculous decision that somebody has already taken.
In their handling of this case, the UNDT confirmed that the “legal system” in the UN will always find a way to ensure that the Department of Management is never actually required to show any management ability.